Painting Nymphs

i was talking to a friend the other night about the nature of artists. He was saying that artists are egotistical, stuck up, pretentious, elitis creatures. I was saying that artists are egotistical, pretentious, earthen creatures, like nymphs. It was interesting how we viewed the same group of people just slightly differently. I still say that artists are nymph-like creatures. And this is why: every time i have hung out with true artists, they celebrate life through thier own being, they love life, they are free loving creatures, most of them smoke, drink, and party, and they view the world with very different eyes. Artists are the personification of the spirit of the earth, in my opinion.

another conversation my friend and i were having was the idea of influence of art upon other artists. He beleives that art history should not be taught because other artist will just take thier ideas and not come up with thier own original style. I said that i could not respect that. He wanted his art to be untouched and uninfluence by outside fingers. He didn't want any other form of art to be a part of his art. And i could not respect that because artists learn and influence eachother, and everything in the world influences other things...you can't run from influence. He would rather have his stuff boxed up and box himeself up rather than learn and grow and show his work. I cannot respect that. I believe that you have to learn about art history and other artists, inorder to learn and grow as an artist yourself. You will absorb other artist's stuff then run with that and create something original to you. I do believe in learning art history. But i also believe in knowing yourself as an artist...but that takes time. That is most definately something that I am still developing.

So to my wonderful readers...you have been presented with both sides of the argument...what is your opinion?
What is an artist: Earth bound or Elitist?
Is learning Art History important or harmful?

-Reijn